Theories Of International Political Economy Free Sample

The news item on the present state of the global political economy that I have decided to write about concerns the ongoing trade conflict featuring China and the United States. The US authorities imposed their tariffs upon more than $360 billion worth of imports coming from China, in response to which China has struck back with its own set of tariff measures against American goods (Choucri, 2019). At issue here are perceived economic disparities between both countries where America asserts that unfair trading practices – such as artificial currency control, pilfering of intellectual property rights, and forced technology transfers are being used by Chinese incumbents, thereby providing them with an ill-begotten advantage over other nations.

From the point of view of Neo-mercantilism, the imposition by America on Chinese imports would be regarded as tolerable (Yu, 2019). The reasoning behind this assertion lies in their belief that China’s unjust trade practices, which include intellectual property thefts, subsidizing state-owned enterprises, and currency manipulation, have provoked an appropriate response from America through tariffs (Goldthau & Keating, 2018). These taxes are intended to safeguard American businesses against detrimental repercussions due to China’s economic policies while maintaining competitiveness in worldwide markets.

Also noteworthy is how neo-mercantilists may object to retaliatory measures taken by China since they opine that the US should not cater for costs accrued under Chinese economic directives (De Graaff et al., 2020). While opinions among them differ regarding the efficacy of tariff regimes, some suggest strengthening punitive duties. Hence, as increase their impact or impose countervailing levies targeting Chinese companies found wanting concerning unfair trading activities (Mueller & Farhat, 2022). Furthermore, others propose the possible adoption of other tactics like limiting access to American markets or slapping sanctions onto individual Chinese firms until a change happens within policy decisions executed by Beijing. Thereby demonstrating clearly that implementation of Tariffs serves us – interests with competitive advantage heightened when across global market scenes.

In Neo-mercantilism, opinions may vary regarding a preferable method to reduce the trade deficit between China and the US. While some proponents of Neo-mercantilism might suggest tariffs serve as an adequate solution to diminish this equity gap, others would propose that negotiations with free-trade agreements exist as superior alternatives (Mueller & Farhat, 2022). Tariffs could function successfully by safeguarding domestic industries while increasing control for the state over the economy. In contrast, it is plausible that negotiation tactics partnered with welcoming levels of commerce are consequential methods towards leveling out disparities existing within mutually beneficial trading relationships between these two nations.

Although adopting tariff strategies can be seen as being expeditious both efficiently short-term solutions capable reducing deficits substantially; however implementing such policies ultimately display limitations when juxtaposed against contractual accord formed via commitment cemented from immersion into congenial co-dependence under one common goal: promoting economic stability through enhanced cooperation bringing enormous future rewards seemingly unattainable before resorting back solely on imposing crippling fees and costs – hence displaying ambiguity around likely outcome regarding which strategy will prove most triumphant amongst differing schools-of-thoughts (De Graaff et al., 2020) surrounding Neo-Mercantalistic ideology upon confronting pressing issues at hand encompassed within tacking sources leading toward rectifying prevailing fiscal imbalances shared amid USA & China bilateral exchange fronts – despite all parties acknowledges possibilities exist honoring every viable option available presenting itself (Mueller & Farhat, 2022).

Benefiting conclusion produced although underlying assumptions backing up varying insights makes them appear far-reaching achievable goals yet not impossible transitioning current status quo thinking to usher us deeper into intertwined reality determining our collective future growth momentum hinges heavily on how well we prioritize navigating complex web woven tightly among multiple stake-holders intrinsic collaboration combined vision paired keen instinctual leadership prowess resonating beyond boardroom echelons affecting vastly broader shades human existence across time-space continuum valuable weighing-in carefully each side debating tenets underlying (Linsi & Mügge, 2019) Neomercatist paradigm forming backdrop alongside hosting different forms coherent arguments put forth needing addressing ahead solve situation presently.

The US’s imposition of duties and counteractive actions on Chinese imports has garnered a polarizing response. There exists an amalgamation of opinions towards this development. Its opponents argue that the move only exacerbates trade tensions between the two countries further, while supporters of Neo-mercantilism endorse it (Linsi & Mügge, 2019). This is because the tariffs affect imports from China and other countries, potentially disrupting the global trade system. Some experts have debated the impact of these tariffs on the US economy, suggesting that the higher costs resulting from them may outweigh any economic benefits they may bring (Mukand & Rodrik, 2020). Some neo-mercantilists have proposed negotiation and free trade agreements as alternatives to tariffs. Reducing the trade deficit, such agreements could benefit both countries.

Both sides will undoubtedly keep debating Neo-mercantilism. Tariffs may cut the US-China trade deficit, but diplomatic solutions may work better. Negotiations and free trade agreements could help both countries develop. Tariffs and other retaliatory measures may address unjust trade practices but may hurt the global economy (Mueller & Farhat, 2022). Such policies can disrupt cross-border trade, which can hurt the global economy. Thus, all options should be considered before deciding how to handle the US-China trade gap. Neo-mercantilism will be debated for some time, with both sides arguing for and against different approaches to uneven trading practices. However, reducing the US-China trade deficit requires thoroughly examining all options. To gain from enhanced trade relations, both countries require a balanced approach that considers their economic and political interests.

It seems that Liberal individuals have a particular way of perceiving and approaching America’s decision to impose tariffs on China. Rather than considering this move as simply an act of safeguarding their economy against trade inequities, Liberals believe such actions may lead to detrimental consequences for global economies (Mukand & Rodrik, 2020). Instead, they would prefer negotiable talk between parties instead of implementing protective measures like imposing more taxes or, even worse, leading towards impending possible wars due to escalations in conflict situations caused by these moves, which is unacceptable from their standpoint or a desirable option according to them (Mukand & Rodrik, 2020). Some supporters among liberal circles could suggest adopting a unilateral negotiation approach, while others might argue inclusiveness through multilateral negotiations amongst other nations.

However, any retaliatory tariff imposed unilaterally upon the US by China will be regarded as counterproductive since further exacerbating hostilities can trigger endless escalation scenarios hurting all involved economically, especially those countries vulnerable within this context (Bhambra & Holmwood, 2018). Ultimately what liberals hope for most is diplomacy-based resolution rather than disrupting economic stability (as well as promoting fairness) via policies beneficial both ways without escalating conflicts unnecessarily generating risks perceived unacceptable compared with potential outcomes embracing mutually rewarding compromises satisfied enough regarding everyone’s needs, thus reducing inequalities above across borders where necessary though fair market practices contributing positive results globally speaking (Bhambra & Holmwood, 2018).

Disagreement about reducing the US trade deficit with China is also present within liberalism. For some Liberals, tariffs may not be an apt solution for curtailing this problem and could unavoidably result in unconstructive spillover effects on global commerce and economic development. Conversely, there exists a faction that claims free-trade agreements coupled with negotiations provide more viable prospects for achieving this objective.

In addition, liberals are also concerned about the potential consequences of the tariffs on American citizens. As a potential outcome, the possibility of augmented expenses for American customers who procure Chinese imported commodities is not to be dismissed. As well as this, businesses could experience significant setbacks caused by China imposing retaliatory tariffs upon them (Ozawa, 2019). Furthermore, the tariffs may result in unemployment since industries could be unable to rival other corporations globally due to amplified business expenditures. Moreover, those who hold liberal beliefs are unsettled about the probable repercussions that may transpire about the international financial system.

Additionally, there is a sense of apprehension encompassing this matter as it pertains to economic stability on a worldwide scale. Instead of rectifying lopsided trade ratios, the tariffs may catalyze augmented economic turbulence. Imposing tariffs on certain goods may interrupt the interconnected network that underpins global trade, thereby creating a potential for suppressed inflationary tendencies within select emerging economies. Such a scenario’s potential ramifications could manifest as an economic stasis, amplifying preexisting worldwide fiscal troubles.

Furthermore, the tariffs may result in unemployment since industries could be unable to rival other corporations globally as a consequence of amplified business expenditures. Moreover, those who hold liberal beliefs are unsettled about the probable repercussions that may transpire about the international financial system. Additionally, there is a sense of apprehension encompassing this matter as it pertains to economic stability on a worldwide scale. Instead of rectifying lopsided trade ratios, the tariffs may catalyze augmented economic turbulence (Linsi & Mügge, 2019). The imposition of tariffs on certain goods may trigger an interruption in the interconnected network that underpins global trade, thereby creating a potential for suppressed inflationary tendencies within select emerging economies. Such a scenario’s potential ramifications could manifest as an economic stasis, amplifying preexisting worldwide fiscal troubles.

Furthermore, liberals are concerned about the environmental impact of tariffs. There is a growing concern among policymakers that nations will resort to tariffs to constrain imports of products manufactured in ways that are deleterious to the environment (Milanovic, 2020). The possibility of a tariff imposition has enticed apprehension. The chief concern is that it may trigger an environmental race to the bottom, where nations compete by lowering their respective standards to obtain any possible edge over rivals.

Finally, liberals worry that tariffs could be used as a tool for foreign policy. It is their apprehension that the United States may employ tariffs as a tool to coerce other nations into submission with regard to its policies (Rodrik, 2018). Some are concerned that the United States government could employ tariffs as leverage to compel other countries into accepting policies of dubious merit. A scenario where global cooperation is jeopardized could result in the deterioration of international relations over a sustained period.

In conclusion, adopting a Neo-mercantilist standpoint would support actions taken by the US administration regarding trade relations with China. On the other hand, adherents of liberalism are likely to be unconvinced and could strongly oppose such measures. In particular, proponents of Neo-mercantilism contend that America’s reaction is warranted in light of China’s inequitable business practices (De Graaff et al., 2020). At the same time, advocates for liberalism believe discussions between both nations should occur instead towards resolving this issue at hand. Although there may exist some variance among each school of thought on certain aspects relating thereof said matter – it remains clear overall; a Neo-mercantilist perspective would favorably look upon these recent developments, whereas an opposing opinion within liberal frameworks seems forthcoming.


Begović, B. (2020). Capitalism, Alone: The Future of the System That Rules the World by Branko Milanović. Panoeconomicus67(1), 127-137.

Bhambra, G. K., & Holmwood, J. (2018). Colonialism, postcolonialism, and the liberal welfare state. New Political Economy23(5), 574-587.

Choucri, N. (2019). International political economy: a theoretical perspective. Change in the international system, 103-129.

De Graaff, N., Ten Brink, T., & Parmar, I. (2020). China’s rise in a liberal world order in transition–introduction to the FORUM. Review of International Political Economy27(2), 191-207.

Goldthau, A., & Keating, M. F. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of the international political economy of energy and natural resources. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Helleiner, E. (2019). Varieties of American neomercantilism: From the first years of the Republic to Trumpian economic nationalism. European Review of International Studies6(3), 7-29.

Linsi, L., & Mügge, D. K. (2019). Globalization and the growing defects of international economic statistics. Review of international political economy26(3), 361-383.

Milanovic, B. (2020). The clash of capitalisms: The real fight for the global economy’s future. Foreign Aff.99, 10.

Mueller, M. L., & Farhat, K. (2022). Regulation of platform market access by the United States and China: Neo‐mercantilism in digital services. Policy & Internet14(2), 348-367.

Mukand, S. W., & Rodrik, D. (2020). The political economy of liberal democracy. The Economic Journal130(627), 765-792.

Ozawa, T. (2019). A note on Dani Rodrik,”Populism and the economics of globalization.” Journal of International Business Policy2, 182-193.

Rodrik, D. (2018). Populism and the economics of globalization. Journal of international business policy1, 12-33.

Yu, F. L. T. (2019). Neo-mercantilist policy and China’s rise as a global power. Contemporary Issues in International Political Economy, 175-196.

Treatment Alcohol Use Disorder Essay Sample For College

Summary of the Case Study

The patient in the case study suffers from alcohol use disorder, a reduced ability to regulate or stop alcohol use. The individual experiences the impairment despite awareness of the alcohol’s health, occupational and social repercussions (Carvalho et al., 2019). The National Survey on Drug Use and Health mentions that the disorder affects approximately 11.3% of adults ages 18 and above. The risk factors linked to alcohol use disorder include a family alcohol abuse history, mental disorders such as depression, experienced trauma, and taking alcohol at an early age. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Health Disorders (DSM-5) diagnostic criteria state that the patients must demonstrate at least two symptoms that cause considerable functional impairment (Moehring et al., 2019). For instance, they take alcohol for unintended more extended periods or increased quantity. The persons find difficulties in their constant desires to control or reduce alcohol. They spend significant time in actions that contribute to alcohol use. The continued alcohol use or craving interferes with their home, school or work obligations.

The patient in the case study is a woman aged 53 years with demonstrated alcohol use disorder. Mrs Perez has had a long history of alcohol use since she mentions that he has experienced addiction challenges since her 20s. She has had difficulties controlling alcohol use for 25 years, which worsened following the launch of the “Rising Sun” casino next to her residence. The alcohol abuse problem has adversely impacted her health, social and economic well-being and decisions. The effect is evident from her weight gain from 115 lbs. to 122 lbs. and settling gambling debts using more than $50,000 borrowed from the retirement account. The mental status assessment shows normal function except for impaired impulse control. She has good orientation, alertness and judgement, and no hallucinations, delusional or paranoid thought processes or suicidal ideations. Treatment decisions involve applying different pharmacotherapy options to assist the patient in controlling the alcohol use problem.

Decision Point One

Considering the available choices, the most appropriate first decision is to initiate treatment with Naltrexone 380 mg. The medication is given through a four-weekly intramuscular injection. The Foods and Drugs Administration approves Naltrexone for managing alcohol dependence and blocking administered opioid effects (Kirchoff et al., 2021). The drug competitively attaches to opioid receptors to reduce endogenous opioid effects in the body, such as drug craving. Research shows that alcohol increases the activity of endogenous opioids, and the opiate systems partly mediate alcohol’s rewarding effects (Conway, Mikati & Al-Hasani, 2022). Naltrexone attenuates cravings in persons with alcohol dependence and blocks pleasures related to alcohol. Patients with alcohol dependence disorder given Naltrexone can effectively abstain from alcohol use or reduce the quantity taken. Common side effects of Naltrexone include vomiting and nausea, which clinicians can avoid by administering the drug after alcohol detox procedures. Naltrexone lacks addictive properties and withdrawal symptoms, which favours its use in treating addiction issues. Therefore, it benefits the patient who smokes while playing at the slot machine. Heavy alcohol users release excess dopamine, which makes them more sensitive to the dopamine reduction effects of Naltrexone, which assists in smoking cessation.

The alternative decision would be to initiate treatment with 250 mg oral disulfiram, given once daily. Disulfiram competitively binds to and inhibits the aldehyde dehydrogenase enzyme. The enzyme is usually involved in the oxidative metabolism of alcohol, which converts acetaldehyde to acetate. Therapeutic disulfiram concentrations in individuals taking alcohol lead to higher serum acetaldehyde levels. The higher serum acetaldehyde results in tachycardia, nausea, facial flushing, palpitations and diaphoresis (Burnette et al., 2022). The symptoms of aggregation, referred to as disulfiram alcohol reaction, present unpleasant experiences that discourage persons from taking alcohol. The consideration to use of disulfiram was not suitable since it is not the first-line medicine to treat alcohol dependence. Besides, its tablet formulation promotes non-adherence since it requires more frequent administration compared to Naltrexone given once a month.

Another alternative decision was to start the patient on 666 mg of oral acamprosate. The drug is commonly used to maintain alcohol abstinence, particularly in individuals who have gone through alcohol detoxification. It balances the inhibitory and excitatory pathways altered during chronic alcohol use and reduces the physiological and psychological discomfort that accompanies withdrawal. Acamprosate does not undergo hepatic metabolism and hence can be given to patients with liver disease, commonly reported in persons with alcohol dependence (Caputo, Domenicali & Bernardi, 2019). However, acamprosate adverse reactions, including nausea, abdominal pain, diarrhoea and pruritus, make this option unsuitable. Various clinical trials conclude that acamprosate is not more effective than disulfiram and Naltrexone. Furthermore, combining acamprosate with other active alternatives does not improve its activity.

The first therapy decision is geared towards ensuring the patient reduces her alcohol consumption. Decreased alcohol cravings and intake would restore normal social, economic and health status. For example, she would reduce gambling, misuse of finances and weight gain. The goals will likely be realized since the patient would tolerate the drug and experience minimal side effects. The patient confirmed the treatment expectations as she reported a “wonderful” experience and had successfully practised alcohol abstinence since starting her medication. She has also reduced her casino visits and associated gambling. Nevertheless, issues concerning anxiety and persistent smoking required attention.

Decision Point Two

During the scheduled appointment, there was concern about the patient’s smoking habits and anxiety. The issues likely contributed to gambling, which still interfered with aspects of her social life. Smoking is associated with adverse health impacts. The most appropriate decision in her case would be to introduce psychotherapy techniques, including cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). The approach incorporates behavioural and cognitive aspects to assist patients in identifying and fixing abnormal thought patterns that contribute to their behaviours, such as gambling and smoking (Magill et al., 2019). CBT provides the patient with the requisite coping skills to adopt alternative behaviours and thoughts promoting well-being.

The alternative choice involves prescribing 5 mg of diazepam three times daily as needed for anxiety management. Diazepam effectively reduces the patient’s anxiety, but there would still be questions concerning whether the option will stop the gambling behaviour. Gambling was the primary contributor to Mrs Perez’s anxiety; hence, eliminating the behaviour will directly reduce the anxiety without increasing drug use. The last choice was to add a drug that could control the patient’s cigarette smoking, such as oral varenicline. Varenicline is a partial agonist at the nicotine receptor, and a dose of 1 mg twice daily treats smoking addiction (Zawertailo et al., 2019). The decision was unsuitable because the patient has demonstrated appreciable response and tolerance to Naltrexone. Other techniques to arrest gambling tendencies will also assist in smoking cessation.

Following the second decision to use psychotherapy techniques, the expected outcome would include reduced participation in gambling, anxiety and smoking. Mrs Perez confirmed during the four-weekly appointment that the anxiety had reduced. The support network was instrumental in reducing gambling behaviour and anxiety symptoms. The support groups provided a promising avenue for expressing her concerns and receiving encouraging solutions (Witkiewitz et al., 2020). Despite the excellent response to counselling sessions, there appeared to be developing issues between Mrs Perez and her therapist.

Decision Point Three

An assessment conducted during the patient’s appointments showed notable treatment progress and decreased gambling behaviour and anxiety. Her disagreement with the therapist required special attention to achieve the desired outcome. The objective would be to ensure Mrs Perez is comfortable with the gambling sessions and strengthen her relationship with her therapist. There was a need to conclusively address elements causing the conflicts to ensure the sessions proceeded as expected. Social groups and networks empower individuals and improve psychological functioning through shared experiences.

The alternative decision would be to advise the patient to proceed with her counselling and group sessions. The decision cannot be considered since it fails to resolve the conflict between Mrs Perez and her therapist, which can affect the treatment outcome. The final decision involved stopping naltrexone treatment and recommend continued counselling and group sessions. However, this decision would constitute premature naltrexone withdrawal before the patient experiences its optimal benefits. Discontinuing the drug before the 12 weeks recommended period increases the risk of relapse (Adhikari et al., 2020). Still, there was essential to resolve the issue between Mrs Perez and her therapist to ensure a positive outcome from the therapy session.

Ethical Considerations

The ethical considerations in the case scenario include treating the patient with dignity and respect. Clinicians should establish therapeutic alliances with patients with alcohol use disorder to understand their issues. They should promote the patient’s well-being by employing evidence-based treatment methods regardless of socioeconomic status, ethnicity and race. Whenever appropriate, they should effectively utilize the available resources and referral systems for the patient to receive high-quality care (Haahr et al., 2020). Professionals should also promote patient autonomy by involving them in all treatment decisions. They should also avoid disclosing treatment information to other parties without seeking the patient’s informed consent.


The patient in the case study experiences alcohol use disorder, which interferes with her social, health and financial status. Decisions are considered using different pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to treat alcohol addiction and influence behaviour change. Naltrexone has proven effective in managing alcohol dependence, with fewer side effects. Therefore, it is more favourable than other choices, such as disulfiram and acamprosate. Cognitive behavioural therapy is beneficial in reinforcing coping strategies that reduce undesirable behaviours such as drug use and gambling. Clinicians and therapists must always establish a good relationship to enhance patient participation in therapy programs. Professionals should be cognizant of ethical issues that may arise during treatment and must act in the patient’s best interest.


Adhikari, S., Tulachan, P., Ojha, S. P., Chapagai, M., Dhungana, S., & Pant, S. B. (2020). Comparison of Disulfiram and Naltrexone in Cases of Alcohol Dependence Syndrome. Ethnicity36(92.3), 0-602.

Burnette, E. M., Nieto, S. J., Grodin, E. N., Meredith, L. R., Hurley, B., Miotto, K., … & Ray, L. A. (2022). Novel agents for the pharmacological treatment of alcohol use disorder. Drugs82(3), 251–274.

Caputo, F., Domenicali, M., & Bernardi, M. (2019). Diagnosis and treatment of alcohol use disorder in patients with end‐stage alcoholic liver disease. Hepatology70(1), 410-417.

Carvalho, A. F., Heilig, M., Perez, A., Probst, C., & Rehm, J. (2019). Alcohol use disorders. The Lancet394(10200), 781-792.

Conway, S. M., Mikati, M. O., & Al-Hasani, R. (2022). Challenges and new opportunities for detecting endogenous opioid peptides in reward. Addiction neuroscience, 100016.

Haahr, A., Norlyk, A., Martinsen, B., & Dreyer, P. (2020). Nurses’ experiences of ethical dilemmas: A review. Nursing ethics27(1), 258-272.

Kirchoff, R. W., Mohammed, N. M., McHugh, J., Markota, M., Kingsley, T., Leung, J., … & Chaudhary, R. (2021). Naltrexone initiation in the inpatient setting for alcohol use disorder: a systematic review of clinical outcomes. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes5(2), 495-501.

Magill, M., Ray, L., Kiluk, B., Hoadley, A., Bernstein, M., Tonigan, J. S., & Carroll, K. (2019). A meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural therapy for alcohol or other drug use disorders: Treatment efficacy by contrast condition. Journal of Consulting and clinical psychology87(12), 1093.

Moehring, A., Rumpf, H. J., Hapke, U., Bischof, G., John, U., & Meyer, C. (2019). Diagnostic performance of the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) in detecting DSM-5 alcohol use disorders in the general population. Drug and alcohol dependence204, 107530.

Witkiewitz, K., Montes, K. S., Schwebel, F. J., & Tucker, J. A. (2020). What is recovery? Alcohol Research: Current Reviews40(3).

Zawertailo, L., Ivanova, A., Ng, G., Le Foll, B., & Selby, P. (2020). Safety and efficacy of varenicline for smoking cessation in alcohol-dependent smokers in concurrent treatment for alcohol use disorder: a pilot, randomized placebo-controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology40(2), 130–136. DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000001172

Utilitarianism: An Ethical Framework For Moral Dilemmas Essay Sample For College


Utilitarianism, a consequentialist ethical theory, holds that an activity is moral if it makes the most people happy (Matti). The theory says we should always increase utility and minimize pain. Therefore, this paper applies utilitarianism to Jim, a botanist travelling in South America who witnesses a public execution, and I’ll compare a utilitarian’s approach to mine and explain why.

Case Study

When he witnesses a public execution in a small town in South America, botanist Jim must decide. A military captain has selected twenty Native Americans at random from the local populace, which has been resisting the government. Jim receives visitor privileges. Jim can choose a Native American and shoot him, freeing the other nineteen. Otherwise, Pedro, the captain’s henchman, will execute.

Utilitarian View

According to utilitarianism, Jim’s decision is moral if it makes the most happy. Jim’s choice should minimize pain and maximize pleasure and happiness. Jim can shoot one guy and save nineteen or let the captain’s henchman execute. If Jim shoots a Native American, he must pick one from twenty. The decision will kill one person and hurt their family and friends. The judgment will also spare nineteen executions. This decision will save nineteen lives, maximizing happiness for the nineteen people, their families, and their friends. If Jim doesn’t shoot, the captain’s henchmen will execute all twenty Native Americans. Twenty people will die from this action, causing pain to their families and friends. The decision will cost twenty lives, causing much suffering. Thus, a utilitarian would advise Jim to shoot one person and save the other nineteen to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. This choice would make most people happy.

Utilitarians base morality on results. Utilitarians think harming others is terrible and bringing the most happiness to the most people is right (Matti). Jim must select between two options with different effects. He may kill one and rescue nineteen by shooting one. He could even let the captain’s henchman execute all twenty people by not shooting anyone. Jim would save nineteen lives by shooting one. Its solution would likely satisfy the nineteen people, their families, friends, and anyone who loves human life. It would also hurt the deceased and their family. It raises the morality of sacrificing one life to rescue many. Jim would let the captain’s henchman kill all twenty people if he didn’t shoot. All those killed and their families and friends would suffer greatly from this event. It would also make life lovers sad, angry, and depressed. It raises whether it is moral to do nothing in a life-threatening scenario. According to utilitarianism, Jim should choose the alternative that maximizes happiness and minimizes suffering. The solution that saves the most lives is moral. Utilitarianism has been attacked for ignoring individual rights and autonomy and focusing on outcomes rather than intentions. Thus, complex moral decisions may benefit from considering other ethical perspectives.

My View

This case study is difficult to decide on. If I were Jim, I’d be torn between killing one or all twenty. The practical approach is the most ethical. I agree with utilitarianism that Jim should shoot one and rescue nineteen. This decision would save nineteen lives and bring the most happiness to the most people, but it would hurt one. This decision maximizes benefit, making it the most ethical.

However, this decision is ethically complicated. Sacrificing one life to rescue others questions the value of individual life and the morality of killing another’s life, even under tremendous stress. Jim may shoot an innocent individual or execute all twenty people for prejudice or bias. Thus, while the practical perspective provides a compelling ethical framework for this situation, I recognize that it is not perfect or infallible. Deontological and virtue ethics may give different approaches to this situation. Consider Jim’s decision’s legal, political, and long-term effects on individuals and society. Thus, while the practical perspective suggests that Jim should shoot one person and save nineteen, he should approach this decision with humility, sensitivity, and a willingness to consider multiple ethical perspectives and potential consequences. Jim’s decisions will affect everyone, so he must act in a way that reflects his ideals and respects human life.


Utilitarianism has been criticized for violating individual rights and liberties. Critics say utilitarianism prioritizes the collective good and can justify individual rights violations. Shooting one person to save nineteen may violate that person’s right to life and liberty. Utilitarians believe individual rights and liberties are only valuable if they enhance happiness and utility (Matti). Utilitarianism aims to maximize happiness; hence shooting one person to rescue nineteen would maximize happiness (Matti). Utilitarianism also faces the challenge of quantifying and comparing happiness and suffering across people and contexts (Matti). Critics say it’s impossible to compare one person’s happiness to another’s, making it hard to identify the most happiness for most individuals. Utilitarians claim that we can still maximize happiness and decrease suffering even though happiness and suffering are hard to define (Matti). In this example, saving nineteen lives by shooting one would increase happiness and utility.

Utilitarianism can prioritize short-term profits above long-term costs, another criticism. Critics say utilitarianism can lead to short-term actions with long-term implications. Shooting one person to rescue nineteen may give immediate relief but may also lead to increasing distrust and animosity between groups or the erosion of communal norms and values. Utilitarians say it’s essential to examine short-term and long-term repercussions when making decisions and that their goal is long-term enjoyment and utility (Matti). Utilitarianism may also disregard individual circumstances, according to detractors. Utilitarianism prioritizes the happiness of the most significant number, which can lead to one-size-fits-all decision-making. However, ethical decisions must take into account each person and situation. Utilitarians argue that while happiness and utility are paramount, individual circumstances and contexts should be considered when making decisions (Matti). The cultural and historical backdrop and each person’s identity and history may be crucial in this circumstance. Thus, utilitarianism offers a convincing ethical paradigm for decision-making but has drawbacks. Critics worry about individual rights and liberties, the difficulty quantifying and comparing happiness and misery, the priority of short-term rewards over long-term repercussions, and the need for more respect for individual circumstances and contexts. These objections demonstrate the significance of approaching ethical decision-making with humility, sensitivity, and an openness to diverse perspectives and implications.


In conclusion, utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory that bases morality on an actor’s ability to maximize happiness for most individuals. According to utilitarianism, Jim, a botanist travelling in South America, should shoot one person and save the other nineteen to maximize pleasure and happiness and minimize pain and suffering. Utilitarianism can help make ethical decisions that benefit society, despite its detractors. Utilitarianism has drawbacks. Utilitarianism may be criticized for favouring the majority. In this situation, shooting one person to save nineteen others would maximize happiness, but it would be unfair to the sacrificed person. Utilitarians say that decisions affecting the larger good should also consider the minority’s interests. If it made the majority and minority happier, sacrificing one person would be justifiable. Utilitarianism’s inability to foretell outcomes is another drawback. Jim shooting one person may have unanticipated consequences. It could anger Native Americans or boost government oppression. Utilitarians say we can still make decisions using the best available knowledge and should be open to altering our decisions depending on new information. In this instance, Jim could shoot one person based on his knowledge and be willing to reconsider if new evidence comes to light. Thus, utilitarianism helps make ethical decisions that benefit society but has drawbacks. According to the practical theory of maximizing happiness, Jim should be shot to save the other nineteen. However, utilitarianism must be applied carefully to both the majority and the minority, and decisions should be revisited and revised as new information becomes available.

Work Cited

Häyry, Matti. “Just better utilitarianism.” Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 30.2 (2021): 343-367.